Amherst Student Was Expelled for Rape. But He Was Raped, Evidence Shows.

The accused is the victim.

Amherst College expelled a male student who was accused of sexually assaulting a female student while he was blacked out. Again, while he was blacked out. The woman he allegedly assaulted was fully lucid.

How did that happen? It didn't. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the male student did nothing wrong. If anyone committed sexual assault during their encounter, it was in fact the female student.

This is one of the few cases where we have an actually good idea of what happened the night in question. Doe accompanied the accuser (who was Doe's girlfriend's roommate) to her dorm room. The accuser performed oral sex on a blacked out Doe (Johnson notes that even the Amherst hearing found Doe's account of being blacked out "credible"). Doe leaves. The accuser then texted two people: First, a male student she had a crush on — whom she invited over after a heavily flirtatious exchange earlier in the evening. Then, a female friend.

The accuser said during her hearing that she only texted one friend to help her handle the assault as she felt "very alone and confused." But her texts with her female friend give no indication of an assault. Rather, the accuser texted her friend "Ohmygod I jus did something so fuckig stupid" [sic throughout]. She then proceeded to fret that she had done something wrong and her roommate would never talk to her again, because "it's pretty obvi I wasn't an innocent bystander."

She also complained that the other man, who had come over after the alleged assault, had taken until 5 in the morning to finally have sex with her.

The accuser found herself friendless after the encounter, when her roommate discovered what she had done.

Between the encounter with Doe and the accusation — nearly two years later — the accuser developed new friends. And as it happens, these new friends were all "victims' advocates."

After making those new friends, long after the incident, she accused John Doe of assaulting her. The adjudication process, as described by Johnson, was a Kafkaesque farce:

Despite an accuser who offered borderline non-coherent responses that subtly expanded on her initial story, the panel ultimately accepted her credibility. It ruled that while Doe likely was "blacked out" during the oral sex, "[b]eing intoxicated or impaired by drugs or alcohol is never an excuse." Since AS [the female] said she withdrew consent at some point during the sexual act, and since Doe couldn't challenge that recollection, the panel was at least 50.01 percent inclined to believe the accuser's tale.

Keep in mind what happened here. John Doe was with his girlfriend's roommate when he blacked out. She then performed oral sex on him. She immediately regretted it—not because Doe had done anything wrong, but because she had done something wrong. Yet he was expelled.

This outcome was obviously a gross miscarriage of justice. I think even the most staunchly pro-victim anti-rape activists would admit that (maybe). But it strikes me that this is exactly the kind of confounding verdict that a college is likely to reach when forced to adhere to the favored policies of the anti-rape activists: affirmative consent and preponderance of the evidence standards. When university administrators poorly trained in legal procedures are asked to determine whether it is more likely than not an accused student had obtained ongoing, enthusiastic, affirmative consent during a sexual encounter, they will invariably convict the innocent.

In a twisted sense, administrators were correct to find John Doe guilty. He was accused of sexual assault, and he couldn't prove the encounter was consensual. Imagine if he had accused her of sexual assault as well—the panel might very well have concluded that they raped each other.

We should expect to see more of this insanity, not less, when the federal government obligates college administrators to insert themselves in students' sex lives.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

380 responses to “Amherst Student Was Expelled for Rape. But He Was Raped, Evidence Shows.”

Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

NYT had an article on Google’s non-diversity earlier this year. The Times was bemoaning the “fact” that Google was 95% white.

The only problem is they were counting Asians as white, and Asians represented around a third of the work force (this includes Indians). I go to Google’s offices from time to time and it definitely does not look 90% white, it looks more like 50/50 to me at the office I go to.

What is so messed up about this is most of these “white Asians” are in fact dark skinned Indians who are working hard and doing great. But they are “white” while hispanics who many are predominately European and white as all heck, are considered POC. It just boggles the mind.

White is simply becoming a term for “groups that worked hard to be successful”. I am mostly Sicilian and we are not really European and are quite dark. But we are now the dreaded “white”, while a ton of lighter skinned people are POC.

I had to go down there last summer and wondered based on the sights, sounds and even smells, I thought I’d ended up in Banglore or something.

The VTA express bus ride from Fremont BART to downtown San Jose was even more culturally jarring.

I’ve noted all the attention to non-diversity in tech lately. And frankly, now the companies are rolling over and making promises to improve diversity.

Based on more than 40 years of history of “affirmative action” and experiencing the results of promoting the lowest common denominator, I predict that the Silicone Valley is about to become a wasteland like most of government.

I assumed that he was limp, because when talking with some lady friends of mine, they said if their man has way too much to drink, he gets whiskey dick. When I read this story, I thought this guy was some super species of man.

It’s a very fine line pharmaceutically speaking; when you have a young man who is— shall we say– over-excitable to get just enough, but not too much booze and/or other intoxicants into him so that a good time can be had by all.

“”Blacked out” does not mean “unconscious.” I take “blacked out” here to mean that he had no memory of anything that happened while he was shit-faced , rather than that he was passed out.”

Yes, I was going to say this but wanted to see if anyone else did first. The guy wasn’t passed out, he was just in a black out and couldn’t remember the incident. (If he actually was passed out he wouldn’t have left afterwards.) And it’s perfectly common to have a hard on when in a black out (and when passed out for that matter).

We had that case a couple of years back where some chick was blowing a guy in front of an ATM on a college campus, while several people watched. She appeared on video seemingly enthusiastically involved in her actions and not the least worried that people were watching.

This became a sexual assault after she sobered up and was embarrassed by her actions. And all of the sexual assault activist types were unanimous that he was a scumbag who raped her.

I was, also, interested to hear how she withdrew consent, and yet continued an act in which he was a passive member. Was his Patriarchy Aura really so strong that she felt preassured to continue even while he as asleep? Did he coerce her with his snores? Or was the Beauty of his Dong such that she simply could not keep it out of her mouth?

Biblical precedence (if one believes the Bible): Lot’s daughter’s got him so drunk he didn’t know he had sex with them. (And God didn’t say boo.) Actually, impossible. This incident tells me it’s time for the big meteor to fall out of the sky and wipe out the human race so that nature can try to evolve an intelligent species.

Obviously a case of child molestation and intentional incest. When the results of those relations came about, Mr. Lot made up a story that totally blamed it on on his daughters. Since there was a full blown patriarchy there, with Lot being The Patriarch of that tribe, there were no questions made, and everyone accepted the obviously made-up story.

I’m having trouble posting links. So, go to http://www.mindingthecampus.org , search “Amherst” and in the essay you can scroll down to the sub-heading “I didn’t, I didn’t, I didn’t” and the link is a couple paragraphs below.

It has real consequences, even if it’s jail time. Loss of tuition $, loss of job prospects that come with degree, loss of job prospects due to rape results, etc. It’s far more than just being kicked out of school.

Since nobody seems to care about the actual guilt or innocence of any of these guys, and just seems interested in making sure some guy gets thrown in the slammer, why bother investigating these things at all? Wouldn’t it just be easier if a rape is reported to go out on the street and grab some random guy and put him away for it? The victim gets justice, cops can close the case, etc, etc, etc.

We should expect to see more of this insanity, not less, when the federal government obligates college administrators to insert themselves in students’ sex lives.

Yes you should.

Did anyone else watch this week’s VICE? It had a segment on the campus rape bullshit. It was a bit skewed towards the rape obsessive narrative, but not totally, and brought up the Rolling Stone fabrication (while leaving out Mattress Girl entirely, even though they showed mattresses being used as “symbols” of rape or something). However, there was an incredibly telling bit from their interviewing Claire McCaskill. She says, and this is as verbatim as I can remember, that the entire purpose of adjudicating on campus is specifically to get around the higher burden of proof of the legal system. She says that outright. Watch it. It’s insane.

It was all you needed to know about this whole farcical obsession (much like this story shows you all you need to know about it).

She says, and this is as verbatim as I can remember, that the entire purpose of adjudicating on campus is specifically to get around the higher burden of proof of the legal system. She says that outright.

Aren’t most of the activists pretty open about that? Or are they just inadvertently transparent? They routinely talk about how horrible it is to even have to make a statement.

No, this was a US politician actually saying without irony or self awareness to a reporter that the entire purpose of trying these things on campus was to get around that pesky burden of proof and presumption of innocence that our annoying legal system has. You have to watch it. Her candidness is breathtaking. it’s actually shocking.

pecifically to get around the higher burden of proof of the legal system. She says that outright.

You act as if you’re surprised.

The accused isn’t going to jail. He’s just getting expelled.

The morons advocating this actually think that is the end of the accused’s punishment. But that really isn’t different for the DOJ liars who think 30 days in the hole is the extent of punishment. Any loss of job prospects, housing, etc, – while enjoyed as further punishment -, is third-party punishment and they couldn’t give a flying fuck about that; if third-party punishment leads to recidivism, well it’s just DOJ job security.

“If MADD had been there to explain why the kids shouldn’t drink, then rape wouldn’t happen.” Said Tony never, because that would be victim blaming. But since it’s a ‘privileged’ male here who’s getting fucked over, say it all you want I guess.

Dude, you joke, but that’s actually very accurate. You can’t be a “victim advocate” without victims. And if you can’t find the victims that you want, well, maybe you’ll just have to fabricate them then.

These are also people who most likely believe that all heterosexual sexual is rape, so in their minds all womyn are rape victims. Except for lesbians, natch. And, any woman who doesn’t think she’s a rape victim is suffering from false consciousness.

Is this entirely true? Plenty of private entities have to follow some form of due process. After all, there are wrongful termination lawsuits at private employers. Clearly there is no recognized freedom of association in at least some private enterprises. Are there no wrongful termination type laws governing private colleges? I have no idea about the law on this.

I’m a lawyer, and neither do I. Contract law seems a little iffy, but perhaps you could argue there was an implied contract regarding expulsion for arbitrary or capricious reasons (which I would say 100% this qualifies under). Again though I have no fucking clue.

I’m not familiar with legalese. I’m assuming there has to be some avenues in civil court for this. I can’t imagine the mental anguish something like this puts someone through when dealing with family and the public.

Actually, it’s kinda the opposite. In order to get government money you have to accept Title IX, which has been deliberately expanded by the Obama justice department to basically do exactly what Amherst did in this case.

So if they hadn’t run a Kafkaesque kangaroo court, they would have been jeopardizing their federal money.

1. Have a friend send you a pile of sexting/texting asking you for something really dirty. Have her beg for more in subsequent texts. Have her accuse you of being a horrible person for refusing to give her more of this. This must be done in your second year of school.

2. In your graduating year have the same friend accuse you of having raped him/her two years previously.

3. Build the case up hugely making you look like the illegitimate cis-lord son of William F Buckly and Richard Nixon.

4. Get kicked out of school.

5. Sue the school for $1,000,000. Bring forth the texts/sexts as proof you were telling the truth and your friend was lying.

6. Friend sues the school because the rape counsellors employed by the school were encouraging her to lie.

An accused student may hire an attorney, but that attorney cannot say anything during the hearing.

That would be fine with me. I’d just hire a lawyer who wouldn’t say a damned thing during the “hearing”. He’d just pull out his video camera and tape recorder. And he’d introduce himself to the chief administrator present as a plaintiff’s attorney.

Robby has managed to maintain his faith in humanity despite a) his run ins with crazed feminists who WENT TO COLUMBIA UNLIKE THAT IDIOT ROBBY, b) his constant delving into the horror show that is modern campus rape policy, and c) periodically looking into the sewer that is the H&R comment section.

It’s kind of inspiring. Robby has looked into the abyss but the abyss has not looked back into him.

(2) File discovery request in court, including the entire diversity staff, senior administration, and asking for a list of the names of every other person who has filed a rape complaint or been accused of rape.

(3) Cash big settlement check.

The university’s lawyers would be fools to let anyone at all be deposed in this case. God only knows what these lunatics in campus administration and diversity would say. No. Just, no.

They’d also be fools to give a plaintiff’s attorney a list of all the other potential plaintiffs they have created.

According to modern campus rules, I believe technically that is rape. Although if a female attorney pantomimes jerking off while a male administrator is speaking, it’s possible he technically raped the female attorney.

Isn’t that a simple solution for the guy? He just needs to “come out” as a tranny. If he is a lesbian tranny, he can even continue dating women, and he has two victim points (three if you count that he’s Asian), against here one victim point (female).

No, FM. You see, alcohol has magical properties on campus. It removes the ability to give or receive consent. Therefore, anyone who imbibes it is no longer responsible for their actions. It’s amazing, really.

Of course, once you are off campus, that logic no longer applies. Drink and drive, and kill someone, it is no longer the alcohol’s fault but your own.

Amherst College expelled a male student who was accused of sexually assaulting a female student while he was blacked out. Again, while he was blacked out. The woman he allegedly assaulted was fully lucid.

Yes, that’s exactly what he is saying. So, since all this campus rape (that’s fake) is driven almost entirely by access to alcohol, it isn’t really the fault of anyone but is in fact the fault of the alcohol.

That explains all those field sobriety tests where they make you answer difficult moral questions and make you jump through all the game theory hoops. They do it to get you off the road so that you don’t just decide to start driving over pedestrians.

The definition of insanity legally is the inability to know what you are doing is wrong. Since most crimes are covered up and the perp does all he or she can to avoid being caught by definition they knew it was wrong.

If you wish to make the case any crime against humanity can only be done by someone insane, then please do so. But, simply stating you think this isn’t creating an argument for what you believe.

Or at least that it was criminal, which if I understand correctly is sufficient to establish sanity in this country. So be it. Point is I don’t believe in free will so we should dispense with caring about justice and focus on a rigorously defined public safety.

I believe he’s saying (just as Robby is) that that’s the prevailing attitude on campus among the activist set. Give him the benefit of the doubt.

This case is possibly even crazier than the Brandeis one with the gay couple where the guy who dumped the other decided 9 months later that the beginning of their two year relationship had been gay, plus all the times he was woken up for sex during the relationship he was molested. Even though he broke up with the other dude because he wanted someone more “sexually aggressive.”

“I think even the most staunchly pro-victim anti-rape activists would admit that (maybe)”.

Can we not call them anti-rape activists? That could be read as implying that those who disagree with them are not anti-rape (perhaps even pro-rape?). And who the hell is pro-rape? It’s bad enough that they get away with casting themselves as the only morally acceptable viewpoint; don’t make their job even easier. Labels matter.

I think we have sufficient evidence to call them “anti-SEX” activists. After all women are too feebleminded and helpless to willingly and knowingly engage in something so revoltingly animalistic as copulation with a man.

There’s no reason to treat these people as misguided or well-intentioned. They aren’t. They are spiteful, bitter people out to harm others who have done them no wrong. While there may be exceptions (like the semi-mythical good cop), when you voluntarily align yourself with bad people doing bad things, I’m not bothered if you get smeared by the broad brush.

“It ruled that while Doe likely was “blacked out” during the oral sex, “[b]eing intoxicated or impaired by drugs or alcohol is never an excuse.” Since AS [the female] said she withdrew consent at some point during the sexual act, and since Doe couldn’t challenge that recollection, the panel was at least 50.01 percent inclined to believe the accuser’s tale.”

So he’s guilty: innocent males don’t groom their girlfriends’ roommates for BJs. He got blackout drunk so he could claim plausible deniability over his coercion of the innocent roommate into oral sex.

Her self-accusatory tone in the post-event texts were caused by the prevailing rape culture, slut shaming and peer pressure. In a healthy, socially just environment she would have been able to properly evaluate her state of victimization immediately.

Yeah, I was going to change mine or “Loki is covered in blood splatter from a wood chipper ‘accident'” but couldn’t fit it all in. Oh well, I just need time to come up with something that implies I ran someone through a wood chipper and fits within the stupid character limit.

More of the ones that wait until you’re asleep, blow you, then wait two years to cry rape and get you kicked out of school, not so much. Same with the one’s that decide to carry around mattresses or write for Rolling Stone’s ‘Letters to Sabrina’ column.

She also complained that the other man, who had come over after the alleged assault, had taken until 5 in the morning to finally have sex with her.

So, after she blaped her roommates boyfriend, she calls some other guy and bangs him?

And, why don’t we know her name? No one should anonymously accuse someone of a crime and demand his/her punishment. That’s bringing whatever happened into the public arena. If you want to maintain your privacy, don’t make public accusations.

Her name is Anna Seward. She wrote about the incident in the school paper, which created some buzz and led to the investigation. Because it wasn’t under investigation at the time her name wasn’t sequestered. Of course by the time she wrote the article she had recast herself as the victim.

The link is in KC Johnson’s article at Minding the Campus. I tried to post but it’s giving me an error.

It’s pretty obvious, even by most of the comments here, that no one would take his accusation seriously. Heterosexual males should be up for sex all the time with every female, so they should never complain about being sexually assaulted and never resist any sexual attention. Don’t you know? Having sexual standards is apparently not manly

His settlement with Amherst should allow him to continue his studies anywhere in the world, pay off any student debt, and still provide a substantial nest-egg for his future, and for that of his children if he chooses to have any – who most assuredly will not be encouraged to attend Amherst.

And, why don’t we know her name? No one should anonymously accuse someone of a crime and demand his/her punishment. That’s bringing whatever happened into the public arena. If you want to maintain your privacy, don’t make public accusations.

Her name is Anna Seward. She wrote about the incident in the school paper, which triggered a reaction from Doe and led to the investigation. Because it wasn’t under investigation at the time her name wasn’t sequestered. Of course by the time she wrote the article she had recast herself as the victim.

The link is in KC Johnson’s article at Minding the Campus. I tried to post but it’s giving me an error.

which perfectly explains WHY college administrations must NOT be allowed to play the role of courts of law. They are not trained in legal procedures, evidence, and such. And these standards of “proof” are SO illegal its not even funny. Hoe is right to sue. And I hope he cleans their clock. and hers.

I found myself wondering whether her replacement gigolo who “finally got round to performing” at five AM might not have a case against her…. can SHE prove she had HIS continues vigourous affirmative assent during the whole encounter, even if we consider its beginning to have come at five AM? Seems HE would have a good case, and if I were the JohnnDoe involved, I’d persue that.. convince him (his replacement)”) to make the charge of rape…. she would have a REAL hard time of proving HIS continuous, etc, assent.

And this all comes of teaching kids stargint at kindergarten that sex is a great way of passing the time, staving off boredom, is morally neutral, and “safe”. I find myself pondering the mess the coming generations will be should this value set continue. As it most likely will

But they are smarter than us. I mean, look at what happened at Penn State when Jerry Sandusky was accused of rape. Graham Spanier and company took a quick look and said nothing more to see, move along now. They are college-educated. Who was that grand jury to question their conclusion?

Why the College failed to ask the question of the woman about how she obtained consent from a “Blacked Out” person is complete stupidity!!! Sex requires consent from both parties and clearly he never gave it.

Everyone forgets about a witness who’s actually been subpoenaed for the trial, but wasn’t allowed to give testimony before the plaintiff began his suit. Normally going by “Chip”, he was last seen at a hardware store, and the most recent picture is from August, 2014: http://bedair.org/Projects/chipper11.jpg

So, basically a man and a woman go into a room drunk and have some sex. And that makes him a rapist and her a victim. Even though they were BOTH drunk. When the woman is drunk it’s the man’s responsibility to not take advantage, because drunkenness is no excuse. But when the man is drunk, the woman is still the victim, because apparently it’s impossible for a drunk woman to take advantage of a drunk man, even if he’s so drunk he has no recollection of the whole encounter.

It continues to amaze me how law abiding, even under extraordinary conditions, most of my fellow citizens are. It baffles me that these administrators and bureaucrats carry on this way secure that no harm will come to them. If I treated someone this unfairly I would fear to leave my home.

These young men have lives nearly destroyed, careers trashed, get socially ostricized and ridiculed, and yet there is no trail of dead college administrator bodies.

The IRS breaks men in error, confiscates houses, cars, bank accounts, and business’s and leaves them broken, and divorced. Yet, there are no indications that dead IRS employees show up in rivers or streets.

As I said, it does not amaze me on those occasions when violence ensues, it amazes me how seldom violence ensues.

This is another excellent example to support the argument that men in general, but in particular university students, should have nothing to do with women. Sure, there are a few NAWALTs (not all women are like that), but all that is needed is one lying psycho bitch to destroy a man’s life…forever.

Yeah man, I finally got it… The ONLY true-blue, 100% guarantee for men to NOT get caught in this kind of “unwillingly got raped by some bitch while I slept” is to cut our cocks off!!!! Lemme go git a knife… I am gonna cut them off EVERY male-type-dude fella I see, as a crime-proofing favor to them… Fer their own good!!!! (Ye ken thank me later).

The young gentleman in question in the incident did not black out. He was blacked out – he was in a blackout. An alcoholic blackout. Wikipedia can help you with this. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Blackout_(drug-related_amnesia)

A person in an alcoholic blackout is not unconscious. This individual did not claim to have been unconscious. He claimed not to remember the events.

“I do not remember” is not a defence. In fact, “I was drunk” is not a defence to sexual assault, in most jurisdictions, since sexual assault is not a specific-intent offence.

There you go, Robby. I just saved you a couple of semesters’ work.

Now if you would like to edit your blog item to remove the false statements/implications about Doe’s mental state, you might regain some of your own credibility.

Holy Science! I knew that they didn’t teach jack in college today but “a couple of semesters”?! Do they spend 18 years teaching verb tenses? 194 semesters to learn the periodic table? That is just embarrassing.

It’s difficult for women to resist a vulnerable man. That’s their version of the “power trip” and domination. It obviously turned her on but he was too sloppy to go further so she decided on plan B. Normally this would be just another night in college life but she had to open her dumb mouth.

Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

my neighbor’s half-sister makes $83 every hour on the computer . She has been without a job for 9 months but last month her payment was $17900 just working on the computer for a few hours. why not try this out

I have to disagree with the article here. Is the situation described here really Kafkaesque? Can something be both “Kafkaesque” and a “farce”? Ben Marcus states: “Kafka’s quintessential qualities are affecting use of language, a setting that straddles fantasy and reality, and a sense of striving even in the face of bleakness?hopelessly and full of hope.” I don’t really see the situation described here as fitting that.